20 ms·
U.S. has world’s highest rate of children living in single-parent households
- orange_tee 6y agoThe discrepancy could be explained by how tax benefits and welfare work between countries. In some countries it pays for a young family to pretend to be a single-parent household to get welfare benefits. In others it is the exact opposite. Also depending on the financial situation it might change incentives. For example in many countries middle class people benefit more from marriage and benefits associated with it than lower class people.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- jacob2484 6y agoThese stats focus on fatherless homes, which are dire: #1. 85% of youth who are currently in prison grew up in a fatherless home. (Texas Department of Corrections) #2. 7 out of every 10 youth that are housed in state-operated correctional facilities, including detention and residential treatment, come from a fatherless home. (U.S. Department of Justice) #3. 39% of students in the United States, from the first grade to their senior year of high school, do not have a father at home. Children without a father are 4 times more likely to be living in poverty than children with a father. (National Public Radio) #4. Children from fatherless homes are twice as likely to drop out from school before graduating than children who have a father in their lives. (National Public Radio) Sidenote - A central tenet of Marxism is the dismantling of the “nuclear family structure.”
- dmpk2k 6y agoWhy was this downvoted?
- klmadfejno 6y agoCiting 3 facts and then adding a sidenote about how Marxism wants this is indirectly implying that Marxism is a noteworthy cause. I don't believe Marxism is a primary cause. While I don't really know anything about Marxism, I doubt it baselessly advocates for the removal of family structures without something to replace it like community engagement It's annoying to hear people preach about the woes of Marxism, because, and this is a biased US perspective, a very small proportion of left leaning individuals would ever describe themselves as Marxist. People doing so would be seen as holding extreme opinions. Hearing fearmongering about communists comes off as a red flag that someone's out of touch with reality and fearful of the amorphous blog that is "the left". It comes off as an implicit strawman. Attacking Marxism as means to undermine the credibility of the left is eye-rollingly tiresome to hear. And yeah, of course, comes with plausible deniability. Nothing good will come of that comment but an unpleasant debate of predictably mainstream left folks arguing semantically that marxism doesn't matter, a fringe actual marxist doing their own thing, and a conservative viewpoint playing off both to say "look there's marxist" or "well I saw this extreme opinion on twitter so no".
- ceilingcorner 6y agohttps://www.csustan.edu/sites/default/files/History/Faculty/Weikart/Marx-Engels-and-the-Abolition-of-the-Family.pdf https://www.csustan.edu/sites/default/files/History/Faculty/... Marxism and Marxist-influenced movements are also very represented in academia, which naturally makes them influential among the literati at large.
- klmadfejno 6y agoThat's great, but also, nobody cares about the opinions of "the litearti". Actual political structures are pretty clear. Marxism is not a popular ideology in America by any definition.
- ceilingcorner 6y agoI think you are uninformed in contemporary critical theory and other popular movements, most of which are absolutely influenced by Marxism, if they aren’t strictly Marxists or Marxians themselves.
- motohagiography 6y agoNot sure why you're being downvoted, we can't have a discussion about the topic of single parent homes without asking where %50 of the parents are, what incentives make that route seem more economical, and what the effects of missing one might be. Discrediting the nuclear family unit as the tool of patriarchy is absolutely a central tenet of anti-oppression education programs. I would be surprised if anyone who had exposure to that kind of curriculum would find that controversial. If that is controversial, perhaps we need better frameworks and tools that enable people to discuss it.
- a_conservative 6y agoAgreed, for instance BLM's website used to say: > We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by... [0] https://web.archive.org/web/20190118185735/https://blacklivesmatter.com/about/what-we-believe/ https://web.archive.org/web/20190118185735/https://blacklive...
- krapp 6y agowhy didn't you post the entire statement? We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable. I don't see anything nefarious or particularly "Marxist" about this. A conservative or Christian would surely agree that greater community and cultural bonds and involvement in the welfare of youth is morally just and in alignment with traditional American values.
- klmadfejno 6y agoBecause only the first part of the sentence looks bad.
- a_conservative 6y agoIt is bad. How in the world would having both your parents living at home somehow limit connection and relationship with other familiy members and the community?
- mensetmanusman 6y agoAnyone who is partner-parenting has probably had that moment when they tell each other: ‘how could anyone do this alone?’ Available person-hours per child in a loving environment is highly connected to positive academic and emotional outcomes for children (some married couples still suffer from one partner being absent, even in the same house though). It’s no surprise that American school children are some of the most medicated for behavior modification. Children respond to divorce worse than they do to the death of a parent. Everyone is punished when more people around them in society is suffering. (except the extremely wealthy, who can afford gated communities with armed guards and who don’t have to ever interact with those below them on the income scale).
- Wowfunhappy 6y agoWould a single parent with one child be so entirely different than a couple with two children, or three or four or five? Coming from someone who would like to be a single parent some day...
- mstipetic 6y agoFor the first year they are so helpless they literally can't fall asleep without you (unless you let them cry for hours). You basically have to keep an eye on them every waking moment if they're not in some kind of enclosure. Even simple things like taking a shower, let alone going to the store are logistical problems. I have no idea how single parents do it
- gher-shyu3i 6y agoThis is the natural outcome of promoting a promiscuous and hedonistic lifestyle. It's clear from the map that there is a very strong correlation between lower rates of single parent households and conservative cultures.
- kasperni 6y agoYou obviously haven't seen much of the world. There are a lot more promiscuous countries than the US with lower rates of single parent households. If anything this shows that preaching conservative values such as abstinence is a complete waste of time.
- gher-shyu3i 6y agoObviously abstinence works. Did you look at the map in the article? Europe and the US/Canada/Russia have way higher rates than conservative societies.
- Veen 6y agoIn theory absitinance works; how could it not? But in practice people do not abstain. There's plenty of evidence that abstinence-only education programs are correlated with increased teen pregnancy. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3194801/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3194801/
- gher-shyu3i 6y agoThey do in practice. You'll have to explain the lower rates of single family households in the traditionally conservative regions (e.g. Northern Africa and Western Asia). Naturally, because of the strong promotion for a promiscuous and hedonistic lifestyle, and how Christianity has failed in the West, the study you cite does not prove otherwise, as it was only done on a US population. Edit: a more interesting study would break down the teen pregnancy population in the US by religion or ethnic background to look at the different rates instead of grouping everyone together. The US is not a monoculture.
- spodek 6y agoWhile the nuclear family most common for most of recorded history, since reading Sex at Dawn and a few related books, I've come to believe that for most of human history -- that is, hundreds of thousands of years before agriculture -- we lived in communities where all adults helped raise all children.
- finiteseries 6y agoBelief isn’t necessary, there is a lot of research on the structure of families. The nuclear family model of parent and children living separate from extended family is most assuredly not the common model throughout recorded history.
- a_conservative 6y agoIt seems many cultures are more connected to their extended family than many in the US, but the point about single parenting still stands doesn't it? Or are you saying that it's normal for Fathers to be uninvolved in their children's lives?
- finiteseries 6y agoI’m saying the nuclear family is a distinctly modern concept that didn’t exist for most of recorded history even in the US, they didn’t make a point about single parenting.
- jelly 6y agoI see. It seems this is what school, nursery, postnatal care is - communities where adults help to raise all children.
- runsWphotons 6y agoThere are many criticisms of this book. (I don't know what to make of the debate, just wanted to bring up that many high profile scholars have criticized it harshly.)
- ceilingcorner 6y ago
- athinggoingon 6y agoIf you look at the numbers, the US seems to be doing a lot better than the rest of the world since 68% of children live in two-parent households versus 51% in the rest of the world. "While U.S. children are more likely than children elsewhere to live in single-parent households, they’re much less likely to live in extended families. In the U.S., 8% of children live with relatives such as aunts and grandparents, compared with 38% of children globally."
- aaron695 6y agoExtended can include two-parents, which is marked as extended not two-parent in this study. So you can't tell. I would think most extendeds in the 38% are two-parent. But it's a good question. Many single parents would also be marked as extended.
- username90 6y agoHow does this count when parents get new partners they live with? Is that extended? The new partner didn't adopt the child so isn't technically a parent.
- aaron695 6y agoExtended is related. Flatmates, for instance, arent counted in the study.
- z9e 6y agoI find it unfortunate we don't focus more on this problem. Children raised in single parent households are more likely to be on a criminal path and end up in prison. There's also significant mental health issues that arise from it [0]. It seems these days being concerned about the breakdown of the American family resulting in crime and mental health issues and the general lack of traditional family values puts you in the conservative category and then you get knee-jerk hostility. Unfortunately I feel our society and current pop culture somehow feeds this problem, but I can't pinpoint how. Some say the welfare system doesn't help either [1]. But I'm not certain that's the full answer, and can also feed into yet more political hysteria. [0] https://www.heritage.org/crime-and-justice/report/the-real-root-causes-violent-crime-the-breakdown-marriage-family-and https://www.heritage.org/crime-and-justice/report/the-real-r... [1] https://ifstudies.org/blog/family-breakdown-and-americas-welfare-system https://ifstudies.org/blog/family-breakdown-and-americas-wel...
- londons_explore 6y agoIt's time we did more research on the economic effects of the ways children are raised... For example, what impact does boarding school have on both the children and the families they come from? (boarding school allows both parents to work all week, allows children more time to socialize with their peers, allows parents to own smaller houses, etc.) What impact do after school clubs have (so parents can both have a full time job). How about residential summer camps? How about the impact of larger remote schools? In a school of 100 children, the range of activities that can be offered is limited. Yet if there were 100,000 children, then children could specialize on really rare topics, and still have enough people interested to fill a class. It just seems there are so many potential ways to make family life & schooling work better for everyone, but without data it's a matter of every parent stumbling in the dark, because for most people child-raising isn't something they have done hundreds of times before.
- cj 6y agoI can't help but think the shutdowns and lockdowns are disproportionately hurting young single adults: the prime group of people who need a way to meet each other to in order to not be single. It's saddening to think that online dating has been the only way to meet new people for millions of young single people over the past 12 months. > Unfortunately I feel our society and current pop culture somehow feeds this problem, but I can't pinpoint how Until the world opens back up and people are able to interact again, I don't see pop culture as the real problem.
- endymi0n 6y agoSounds to me a like a classic consequence of "pro-life until born". If you don't know how to pay for health insurance and college of a prospective kid, how are you supposed to have more of them? Economically speaking, I think it's interesting (for various definitions of interesting) how little value the U.S. as a society puts on future educated citizens, and by now this form of shortsightedness is really starting to show. Because, if you really zoom out, everything you invest into kids will come back 30 years later. Most other western societies (and even "evil" China) have realized that investing into childcare, education, youth programs, financial support for parents and and kids' healthcare is really the ultimate societal index fund. Compare that to the US, where children are seen as a personal luxury that you have to afford.
- f6v 6y ago> how little value the U.S. as a society puts on future educated citizens It is much easier to import highly educated professionals from abroad.
- williesleg 6y agoWell there's your problem.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- ri45 6y agoDavid Brooks argues that the American style nuclear family was a historic oddity and never really built to last. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2020/03/the-nuclear-family-was-a-mistake/605536/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2020/03/the-nuc... If anything, it was designed to enhance consumerism.
- ameister14 6y agoI think it's important to highlight something: *While U.S. children are more likely than children elsewhere to live in single-parent households, they’re much less likely to live in extended families. In the U.S., 8% of children live with relatives such as aunts and grandparents, compared with 38% of children globally.* The UK, with a similar lack of living with extended family and a similar culture, has a 21% single parent rate compared to the 23% found in the US.
- tzs 6y agoNote that according to the article the US is also above the world average for the rate of children living in two-parent households. The US is way below the world average for the rate of children living in extended families.